Click on WORD or PDF below for full content.
Mark Steyn is not convinced we’re a “center-right” country.
… “The greatest dangers to liberty,” wrote Justice Brandeis, “lurk in the insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well meaning but without understanding.”
Now who does that remind you of?
Ha! Trick question! Never mind Obama, it’s John McCain. He encroached on our liberties with the constitutional abomination of McCain-Feingold. Well-meaning but without understanding, he proposed that the federal government buy up all these junk mortgages so that people would be able to stay in “their” homes. And this is the “center-right” candidate? It’s hard for Republicans to hammer Obama as a socialist when their own party’s nationalizing the banks and its presidential nominee is denouncing the private sector for putting profits before patriotism. That’s why Joe the Plumber struck a chord: He briefly turned a one-and-a-half party election back into a two-party choice again. …
… Slowly, remorselessly, government metastasized to the point where it now seems entirely normal for Peggy Joseph of Sarasota, Fla., to vote for Obama because “I won’t have to worry about putting gas in my car. I won’t have to worry about paying my mortgage.” …
Michael Gerson on the decency of George Bush.
… I have seen President Bush show more loyalty than he has been given, more generosity than he has received. I have seen his buoyancy under the weight of malice and his forgiveness of faithless friends. Again and again, I have seen the natural tug of his pride swiftly overcome by a deeper decency — a decency that is privately engaging and publicly consequential.
Before the Group of Eight summit in 2005, the White House senior staff overwhelmingly opposed a new initiative to fight malaria in Africa for reasons of cost and ideology — a measure designed to save hundreds of thousands of lives, mainly of children under 5. In the crucial policy meeting, one person supported it: the president of the United States, shutting off debate with a moral certitude that others have criticized. I saw how this moral framework led him to an immediate identification with the dying African child, the Chinese dissident, the Sudanese former slave, the Burmese women’s advocate. It is one reason I will never be cynical about government — or about President Bush.
For some, this image of Bush is so detached from their own conception that it must be rejected. That is, perhaps, understandable. But it means little to me. Because I have seen the decency of George W. Bush.
David Harsanyi has expectations.
… Anyway, Obama has promised five million new, high-wage jobs in renewable energy and to stop global warming so we won’t need oil for long. Obama promises more nuclear power, as well — after some polling data assured him we like the sound of it. Obama also has promised that the “central” focus of his new nuclear policy will be “eliminating all nuclear weapons.”
It’s a little unclear if he means our nuclear weapons or the arsenal of (soon enough) Iran, Pakistan and Russia. No worries; Obama has promised to have a face-to-face and give these folks a what-for should anyone misbehave.
So, you see, we’re all here for you, man. Americans and the world. We can’t let you forget your promises. Waiting won’t be easy. It’s difficult to be patient when you sit on the cusp of Utopia.
Please don’t mess with expectations; just bring it on home.
John Fund sees off Michael Crichton.
Michael Crichton, writer of such best-sellers as “The Andromeda Strain” and “Jurassic Park,” was far more than a great storyteller. His books tackled meaty issues such as medical malpractice, airline safety, biotechnology, sexual discrimination, and global warming.
That last topic produced perhaps his most controversial book, “State of Fear,” a novel that imagined a conspiracy to exaggerate natural disasters in order to keep the developed world on edge and unsettled. A radical environmental charity stands to benefit most from this “state of fear,” and the plot’s protagonist is an idealistic young lawyer named Peter Evans who learns that the cause he has devoted his life to is rotten to the core. …
Crichton tells us how aliens caused global warming.
Townhall column on the election lessons of Michael Crichton.
Celebrated author and veritable Renaissance man Michael Crichton died this week, and upon reflection his passing brings up some interesting thoughts on Barack Obama’s historical election. Allow me to pontificate, if you will.
Crichton and Obama actually have much in common. Crichton was born in Chicago, and also attended Harvard, both for his undergraduate work and for medical school. Crichton was incredibly well-learned, with a vast knowledge base and an exceptional intellectual pedigree, and viewed American universities as important places of cultural exchange. And he too was somewhat politically controversial.
But the similarities end there. Michael Crichton was a noted libertarian. He spoke often and eloquently about the dangers of a speculative and undisciplined media, the pseudo-religious overtones of the left’s environmental fanaticism, and a perceived rejection of scientific evidence by global-warming alarmists.
Interesting post in Volokh by Todd Zywicki on the 2012 Palin prospects.
This is pure speculation, but if I had to guess, I’d predict Sarah Palin will not run for President in 2012. For personal reasons. Let’s face it–a person with 5 kids, including a special-needs child, can take off two months of her life and run for Vice-President. And let’s further face it–Vice-President is not that hard of a job. But taking off two years away from home to trudge around Iowa and New Hampshire? Honestly, I don’t know why anyone would want to do that–I read that Chris Dodd actually enrolled his kids in Iowa schools when he was running for President. That’s pretty weird, if you ask me. You have to be relatively unusual person (ok, “sick” is the word I’m really thinking of) to undertake the project of running for President. …
Zywicki also posts on the CA reactions to the gay marriage referendum. A Mormon temple in Westwood was targeted by hundreds of gays. Some carrying signs saying, “No More Mr. Nice Gay.” How cool was that?
So let me get this right–those who are upset about the passage of Proposition 8 in California have decided that the thing to do is to pick on the Mormons? So one marginalized group decides that the way to go is to vent their outrage against another marginalized group in society? Unbelievable.
Relying on Exit Polls are dicey, of course. But according to the Exit Polls, the decisive difference in Proposition 8′s passage was two reasons. First, 70% of black voters supported it. There were 10,357,002 votes case on Prop 8. The winning margin was 492,830 votes. And they were 10% of the electorate. So that means there were 1,035,700 votes cast by black voters. That right there provided a difference of 414,280 votes. If I’m doing my math right, that is 84% of the winning margin. There was an article in the Washington Post on this today. A majority of Hispanic voters also supported Proposition 8. …
Which brings us to Thomas Sowell on affirmative action and gay marriage.
… Marriage has existed for centuries and, until recent times, it has always meant a union between a man and a woman. Over those centuries, a vast array of laws has grown up, all based on circumstances that arise in unions between a man and a woman.
Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes said that law has not been based on logic but on experience. To apply a mountain of laws based specifically on experience with relations between a man and a woman to a different relationship where sex differences are not involved would be like applying the rules of baseball to football.
The argument that current marriage laws “discriminate” against homosexuals confuses discrimination against people with making distinctions among different kinds of behavior.
All laws distinguish among different kinds of behavior. What other purpose does law have?
While people may be treated the same, all their behaviors are not. Laws that forbid bicycles from being ridden on freeways obviously have a different effect on people who have bicycles but no cars.
But this is not discrimination against a person. The cyclist who gets into a car is just as free to drive on the freeway as anybody else. …